Racism in America: Black woman pretends to be white, job offers come rolling in...

[Phokus]

(1) Once again you cannot determine if this is a case of culture or race. See "Discrimination in Low Wage Labor Markets"

(2) What does this have to do with Republicans? Are you saying NYC is a bastion of Republicanism?

(3) Oh I get it. We are talking about employers. Well obviously only Republicans create jobs

Cannot determine? They intentionally listed the white applicant as having a fucking felony. "Hmm, this guy has a black sounding name, better throw away the application" ... "Well, this white guy has a felony, but lets give him a chance!"

Are you fucking serious?

 

[Geosurface]

If employers really go for white felons over blacks racism must be pretty damned strong or there are legitimate considerations at play that become obvious when you run a large company for a long time and have enough bad experiences.

If racism is this strong I suggest we stop trying to fight it.

 

[waggy]

i never understood why a company would not hire someone based on race. I wanted my business to make as much as possible. so i hired the best person. if a black was top i hired them, if a white i hired them.

 

[fskimospy]

If employers really go for white felons over blacks racism must be pretty damned strong or there are legitimate considerations at play that become obvious when you run a large company for a long time and have enough bad experiences.

If racism is this strong I suggest we stop trying to fight it.

One of ATPN's biggest racists tells people to embrace racism.

Shocker.

 

[nehalem256]

i never understood why a company would not hire someone based on race. I wanted my business to make as much as possible. so i hired the best person. if a black was top i hired them, if a white i hired them.

But you see it is only conservatives that care about making money over anything else.

The study was done in NYC a bastion of liberalism. And we all know liberals care more about, their apparently racist, principles than making money.

 

[Incorruptible]

See my sig (right wing nutjobs absolutely hate it).

http://money.cnn.com/2005/06/17/news/economy/hiring_bias/

All else equal, if you have a black person and a white person with equal qualifications but the white person has a felony on his record, he's on equal or better footing than his black counterpart.

That's the free market at work. And it's exactly why racists favor Republicans and Libertarians (Stormfront LOVES Ron Paul)

The free market is much more than that and not racist and Ron Paul was also a follower of Ghandi and Martin Luther King Jr

 

[Thebobo]

...Typical of you and your ilk.

And your counter statement is typical of you and your ilk!

 

[Phokus]

But you see it is only conservatives that care about making money over anything else.

The study was done in NYC a bastion of liberalism. And we all know liberals care more about, their apparently racist, principles than making money.

lol if you think the owners of capital are 'liberal' and if you don't think it's much worse in more conservative areas of the country.

 

[Phokus]

The free market is much more than that and not racist and Ron Paul was also a follower of Ghandi and Martin Luther King Jr

This Ron Paul?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEC68vTQwP8

Also, the same Ron Paul that created those racist newsletters then lied about not knowing about it? Yeah ok.

 

[Apple Of Sodom]

If I've got a pile of 100 resumes, I probably won't be calling Cletus, Billy Bob, or Jethro for interviews either. Sucks to be them, but we all have our biases.

Agreed. They *may* be qualified people, and I guarantee that Jethro is white, but the type of parents who name their kid Jethro also watch Honey Boo Boo and wish they were as classy as that family.

 

[Apple Of Sodom]

i never understood why a company would not hire someone based on race. I wanted my business to make as much as possible. so i hired the best person. if a black was top i hired them, if a white i hired them.

It isn't really based on race. Certain names (from whites and blacks) come from parents with certain undesirable socioeconomic statuses. White trash names, "black" sounding names...it isn't that the employer doesn't want whites or blacks; it is that the employer doesn't want to hire people whose parents named them Bubba or Jaleel. Why? Because these names tend to come from poorer families where education and proper upbringing is not a focus. If I remember correctly, in Freakonomics they were able to correct much of the bias by changing a fake applicants names from Jamal or some such shit to James, but nothing else, not even race.

Again, it is about the name itself. Well educated people with good pedigree don't generally name their kids Omar and Laquifa.

 

[nextJin]

This Ron Paul?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEC68vTQwP8

Also, the same Ron Paul that created those racist newsletters then lied about not knowing about it? Yeah ok.

You didn't watch the video did you?

Also the Paul is a racist debunk thread is that way

---'>

 

[waggy]

It isn't really based on race. Certain names (from whites and blacks) come from parents with certain undesirable socioeconomic statuses. White trash names, "black" sounding names...it isn't that the employer doesn't want whites or blacks; it is that the employer doesn't want to hire people whose parents named them Bubba or Jaleel. Why? Because these names tend to come from poorer families where education and proper upbringing is not a focus. If I remember correctly, in Freakonomics they were able to correct much of the bias by changing a fake applicants names from Jamal or some such shit to James, but nothing else, not even race.

Again, it is about the name itself. Well educated people with good pedigree don't generally name their kids Omar and Laquifa.

i disagree with this too.

before i retired one of my boss's had the name Bubba. Though he had never lived in the country.

i don't care about the color or name. what matters is how they come into the interview, how they do, work history etc.

 

[BoberFett]

i disagree with this too.

before i retired one of my boss's had the name Bubba. Though he had never lived in the country.

i don't care about the color or name. what matters is how they come into the interview, how they do, work history etc.

If you have 100 resumes, you don't have time to interview and get know every one of those people on a personal basis. You need to a fill a position with a qualified individual and be done with it. Unless something jumps out of his resume at me, John will get an interview and Bubba probably won't.

If my actual legal name were Bubba and I wanted a career in anything other than auto mechanic I'd consider going by my middle name, or a nickname, or anything else.

 

[Fern]

A couple of things.

1. The 'Black" account had been listed for two years. I suspect if you go two yrs without a job employers may feel there's some valid reason you've been unable to get one, or that you're not serious about wanting one, or that your skills have atrophied.

2. Do those accounts use photos? If so, whose photo did she put on the white site, if some hot looking white woman I can easily see her getting more offers than others.

Fern

 

[Fern]

I'm curious about something.



This is an employer's market. Supposedly there are no jobs, and companies get 1,000 resumes for any job posting. Why would these employers be contacting her instead of the other way around?

Has anybody on this forum had an experience recently where the employer pursued them rather than the other way around?

Something about this story doesn't pass the sniff test.

No, it doesn't.

Fern

 

[werepossum]

It isn't really based on race. Certain names (from whites and blacks) come from parents with certain undesirable socioeconomic statuses. White trash names, "black" sounding names...it isn't that the employer doesn't want whites or blacks; it is that the employer doesn't want to hire people whose parents named them Bubba or Jaleel. Why? Because these names tend to come from poorer families where education and proper upbringing is not a focus. If I remember correctly, in Freakonomics they were able to correct much of the bias by changing a fake applicants names from Jamal or some such shit to James, but nothing else, not even race.

Again, it is about the name itself. Well educated people with good pedigree don't generally name their kids Omar and Laquifa.

What's wrong with Omar? Remember Omar Sharif? He ruled.

I once had a co-worker who worked a second job as a waiter. His boss was named Barbie. Her boss was named Bambi. If we can get past Barbie and Bambi, we should be able to get past any name.

 

[OverVolt]

This is sociology 101 type stuff.

Its statistical discrimination.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_discrimination_(economics)

The person going through the applications isn't racist, just lazy.

 

[Pia]

This is sociology 101 type stuff.

Its statistical discrimination.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_discrimination_(economics)

The person going through the applications isn't racist, just lazy.

You mean it could be statistical discrimination rather than - or in addition of - racism.

There's no way to infer from any of those three possibilities that the person going through the applications is lazy, though.

 

[Spungo]

There's no way to infer from any of those three possibilities that the person going through the applications is lazy, though.

I think it's automatically assumed. HR is the biggest joke in the history of the world. They're so disconnected from reality that they run software to look for keywords in resumes. They don't even read resumes. The computer probably filters out names like Laquisha and it might have filters for race enabled. I can picture some HR retard saying "This company isn't diverse enough. We need a east indian woman." Filtering out everyone else is as easy as snapping your fingers.

http://business.time.com/2012/06/04/the-skills-gap-myth-why-companies-cant-find-good-people/

Another factor that contributes to the perception of a skills gap is that most employers now use software to handle job applications, adding rigidity to the process that screens out all but the theoretically perfect candidate. Most systems, for example, now ask potential applicants what wage they are seeking — and toss out those who put down a figure higher than the employer wants. That’s hardly a skill problem. Meanwhile, applicants are typically assessed almost entirely on prior experience and credentials, and a failure to meet any one of the requirements leads to elimination. One manager told me that in his company 25,000 applicants had applied for a standard engineering job, yet none were rated as qualified. How could that be? Just put in enough of these yes/no requirements and it becomes mathematically unlikely that anyone will get through.

You have every qualification but you have a ghetto name in the filter list? The HR people won't even see your resume. Laziness to the power of infinity.

 

[HumblePie]

Uhhh, I was listening to NPR a couple of months ago and they aired a story about a study into the very thing listed in the OP.

They were basing the study on resumes sent in with "ethnic" sounding names versus "white" sounding names to see what responses were like. They did it for a variety of career fields. They also did applications with various ethnics put in for the applications, but all the same skill sets to see which ones got the bigger responses.

The conclusion of that study was that there was little to no significant difference found in most cases. That Shaniqua was just as likely to get a call back on her resume as Linda.

Now I guess I have to spend time finding the study that NPR was talking about.

 

[xBiffx]

Uhhh, I was listening to NPR a couple of months ago and they aired a story about a study into the very thing listed in the OP.

They were basing the study on resumes sent in with "ethnic" sounding names versus "white" sounding names to see what responses were like. They did it for a variety of career fields. They also did applications with various ethnics put in for the applications, but all the same skill sets to see which ones got the bigger responses.

The conclusion of that study was that there was little to no significant difference found in most cases. That Shaniqua was just as likely to get a call back on her resume as Linda.

Now I guess I have to spend time finding the study that NPR was talking about.

My loins are quivering with anticipation.

D: Wait! That came out wrong.

I'm very interested in seeing this study. I am also interesting in seeing how they worked ethnicity into the resume. I know here, that probably would have been scanned, flagged, filtered and automatically denied.

 

[readymix]

yolanda??? yolanda vega!!! wish she would call me.

 

[werepossum]

I think it's automatically assumed. HR is the biggest joke in the history of the world. They're so disconnected from reality that they run software to look for keywords in resumes. They don't even read resumes. The computer probably filters out names like Laquisha and it might have filters for race enabled. I can picture some HR retard saying "This company isn't diverse enough. We need a east indian woman." Filtering out everyone else is as easy as snapping your fingers.

http://business.time.com/2012/06/04/the-skills-gap-myth-why-companies-cant-find-good-people/

You have every qualification but you have a ghetto name in the filter list? The HR people won't even see your resume. Laziness to the power of infinity.

Very interesting, thanks. I can't imagine a much bigger career ender than getting caught running software to filter out "ghetto names", so it's probably widespread. (I generally later find that the more incredibly stupid I find something, the more likely it's in wide practice. LOL)